We had a lot of fun in February, didn't we? The Armada World Cup went well, and I even wrote some other articles to!
Escort Ship Tactics: (Imperial) (Rebel)
Activation Advantage: How to Mitigate the Threat
Lessons from the World Cup... okay, that might be cheating.
So... I guess I like writing stuff about the Vassal Tournaments, and this month isn't really going to be different, since we have a new tournament starting up! So let's get this month started right with Previews for that Tournament!
Who cares about Team Analyses, when you can read about the Match-up of the Week, and watch it tomorrow?
Team Analysis for Hammers of Kuat
Just perused these articles, they are very well written, and a valuable resource for players learning the ropes, or stuck with certain parts of game play / fleet use etc.
I just wanted to post, and say well done, and thanks for taking the time to write them up.
Oh, I missed posting a team analysis.
Also, I posted my reaction to Wave 3.
Just kidding, here it is.
And not mine, but an excellent read, here's an X-Wing player's analysis of dice and variance. Again, this is an excellent read, even if you don't play X-Wing or have never played X-Wing. There's a ton that we can take away from it as Armada players, and it's something I'd like to go into in greater depth in the near future.
Let's talk about the new FAQ and Tournament Regulations. What's new? What's changed? What is FFG paying their proofreading department?
These are fantastic, thank you.
Just one more to go now... SUCKITIMPS is done.
Another Store Championship, but this time it's a guest article by the Champ!
(I didn't play, just TO'd)
Another Store Championship, but this time it's a guest article by the Champ!
(I didn't play, just TO'd)
Just a point to note on your objectives article, I don't think that the three you identified (Precision Strike, Fleet Ambush, and Hyperspace Assault) necessarily favour first player. You have to remember that the data results you have are always going to be skewed because first player always takes the objective they believe represents their best chance of winning based on the context of the fleets and their opponent.
I think the data result you're seeing is more in line with your secondary statement that people are willing to take those objectives, and I suspect (though I admittedly don't have any empirical data to support this) it's because the majority of fleets are not optimised for the objectives they have taken, or at least for those specific objectives at any rate. Discounting those objectives wholesale though seems off, especially in the whole 'lets not build to them' way you suggest.
I would also suggest that your approach doesn't actually successfully build an exceptionally terrifying second player fleet (it's a good list but I've seen plenty worse) and I believe that stems from the fact that you chose your objectives before initially building your fleet. I think that's putting the cart before the horse, and that if you worked the other way around the hypothetical fleet you suggest would be better for it.
It did also make me laugh that even when building a list that was ostensibly designed to go second, you couldn't help but put in a bid (the first player, first place meta is strong here).